Conference 7.286::digital

    An excellent idea!
    
    At my first salary planning meeting 2 years ago (myself a rookie
    manager) I saw a chart showing that Digital on average 'overpayed' all
    job codes above individual contributors and level 1 managers compared
    with the rest of the companies in our industry. And everytime since
    then, when I've seen salary data, it bears out the truth that we have
    many, many highly paid people in our company. 
    
    A former Field Service DM who moved into our 'consultants' program
    cleared out his office and inadvertantly left behind a copy of his own
    EDCF (employee data change form). His salary approaches 6 figures and
    District Manager level people are pretty low on the totem pole.
    
    The evidence, first hand and from the outside consultants who advise us
    during salary planning, shows that DEC tremendously inflated the
    salaries of people who were here during our go-go days and nobody ever
    took a pay cut.

    re: .2 - well then lets see........#1. - that's a pain for us
    "individual contributors" at the VERY least. #2 - howsa 'bout wackin'
    THOSE guys for once?? 

    I would like to see. "Equal pay for Equal Work".
    But as you know that is very Unlikely.
    
    
    Mike...

    
    Question:
    
    Could someone point me in the direction of salary ranges for various
    job codes?  Actually, could someone post them here so we can discuss
    them?
    
    The comments about salaries inflating during the boom years intrigues
    me.  
    
    -Ed
    
    
    
    

    .-1

    >Could someone point me in the direction of salary ranges for various
    >job codes?  

    i think it depends on what country you are working in, for example, 
    DEC in UK have a different pay scales than DEC-USA for example.

    Engineers at DEC seem to make the industry average in the US, but
    I hear than once you become a consultant or even more than consultant,
    then you the one who writes you own salary, especially if you are in
    a hot areas of consulting.

    /nasser

    I was always under the impression that (in the US) you could
    always ask your superior to tell you the pay scale for 
    your own job, and for the next level up (i.e., the scale
    you'd be on if you go promoted).   More than that, "they" won't 
    tell you.

    RE: -1
    
    That's the way I understand it too.
    
    I can get personnel to tell me my salary range and the range for the
    job code associated with my own boss (up 1 level) but if I want to know
    the range for his/her boss and on up the ladder - NO WAY JOSE.

    .7 Yep, same in the UK.

    RE: .7 I've always wondered about that. Why is the range 2 above
    so secret? It's not really secret as once you get a promotion
    you can now know it. I've been told that at various times that
    you are entitled to know the range above yours as an incentive.
    But you don't need to know the range above that. 

    But why should one limit themselves to shooting only for the step
    above? 

    I've long believed that the real reason is that one is not expected 
    to be able to "understand" the reason behind salary ranges two steps
    above. 

    			Alfred

    The real reason is to prevent the kind of discussions we are having
    here - Is VEEP X really worth all that much?
    
    Dick

    You shouldn't be looking at the pay of others. You should be saying "Am
    I worth what I am making?" And "Do I earn what I am making?" "Do I give
    100% 8-hrs a day?"

    For years Digital has been low in the industry as far as pay goes. Ken
    Olsen made pittance for the CEO of a $14B corp.

    If you complain about overpaid managers, then you probably don't see
    them come in at 7:30 for meetings and leave at 7pm after reading their
    mail. I worked for a manager who had to come in on Saturday to work
    because that is the only time the phone didn't ring and he could get
    his work done.

    The new DEC downsizing is cutting into managers much more than the
    workers. They are going from a 1-10 ratio to a 1-20+ ratio. That means
    that there are two times too many managers, roughly. My group had 42
    project managers and now there are 20. Do you want to be in their
    shoes?

    Would you like to be in the position where you have to let some of your
    workers go, while you're worrying about being let go yourself? Not me!

    So if you are going to manager bash, let's get some facts and not base
    it on gut feelings you have about the subject.

    Peter

    
    
    
    
       I'd like to go back a few notes. I think it was note 3 that asked 
    about our management stucture and why some of these people haven't been
    hit with the cuts.
    
       This has been a real HOT topic with just about everyone I talk to.
    It seems a large percentage of the cuts (90% or more) have come from
    the "worker bee" ranks. Maybe it's just me, but why do we need so many
    managers, and so many layers of management? And after all the cuts that
    have already taken place who are these managers managing anyway?
    
       It seems we're doing this back asswards, taking people who do actual
    work, and in a lot of cases interface directly with the customer, and
    giving them "the package", while a very large portion of overhead
    positions are still around. And even worse, cutting the $25K to $50K
    people who contribute to the bottomline, while the $90K to ?00K over-
    head positions seem immune! Is it me or is something very wrong with
    this picture?
    
    
                                             Phil...
    
       I've seen groups (sales units) go from 10 to 12 people down to 5 or
    6, but all management positions 

>    The new DEC downsizing is cutting into managers much more than the
>    workers. They are going from a 1-10 ratio to a 1-20+ ratio. 

	Where did you get that information? I'd like to think it was true.

			Alfred

    Let me add fuel to the fire.
    
    1) Cutting *project* managers is not cutting *managers*.  Real managers
    write reviews, hire and fire, and so on.  Project managers are really
    individual contributors who work with teams of people.  They are not
    part of the hierarchy of management (pecking order).
    
    2) As somebody once said, you need someone to handle the administration
    of the downsizing process, so it is natural that ic's will go first.  
    
    3) If the entire work force is tfso'd, then the manager should expect
    to get his message promptly after the group is gone.  Having that many
    "excess people" can't be a sign of good management!  
    
    4) Managers rarely note here, so we won't find out about it.  We have a
    biased sample within the notes conferences and so none of the apparent
    statistics is worth the rubber needed to erase them.
    
    Dick
    
    

    RE:  Salary Levels
    
    As a manager, each year at salary planning time, I was given a printout
    which showed the pay range of every job code in the company.  However,
    I was always given explicit instructions to give my people only their
    own salary range and the range one level above them.  And then, only
    give the information if they asked for it.  Don't remember all the 
    rationale, but the main point was that they might need the information 
    to assess potential promotion opportunities [remember those?], but 
    salaries above the next higher level was not "appropriate" information
    to share.
    
    Also, the salary tables ended at the VP level.  Apparently, they were
    covered under a different compensation basis.  In any event, their
    salary information was certainly not available to the management ranks,
    probably for the same reasons discussed above.
    
    
    RE:  Management Downsizing.
    
    It does seem that most of the cuts so far have come from the IC level. 
    I'm reminded of a discussion I had not long ago with a friend who is a
    manager with NE Tel (one of the "Baby Bell" companies).  When faced
    with the need to downsize and increase the span of supervision at the
    same time, NE Tel's approach was to eliminate an entire level of
    management!  Of course, those people could interview for other jobs at
    higher/lower levels.  Many of them were also eligible for retirement. 
    But, the bottom line was that one management layer was entirely
    eliminated from the company.  Not a bad approach.
    
    Chet 

    These are miserable times to be a manager in this company.
    Think about it.  You might lose your job.  You might have
    to TFSO people in your team.  You might make a foolish
    political move that results in your entire team going away.
    
    You are feeling less than motivated.  Your team is feeling
    less than motivated.  You are responisible for motivating
    your team.
    
    The strategy is unclear so you don't know how to do your
    job.  Your team needs more help in understanding the
    strategy, but you can't explain it.
    
    It's probably a lot different if you're a VP--maybe worse.
    Maybe it's just awful for everyone.
    
    The only positive thing about all this change is that we
    can make more change.  The rules are changing and we can
    probably initiate improvements in our organizations if
    we can find the energy to work on it.

    re.16
    
    
    DEC could/should TFSO (or whatever) 3 levels of mgrs.  I'd be willing
    to bet the only difference the company would notice is increase
    revenues from the monies saved from salary.
    
    Derek

	RE: .18 You mean you don't think we'd get more done because of
	fewer meetings to go to? :-)

			Alfred

    
    A nit:
    
    I don't think cutting expenses on salaries affects revenue, it affects
    profit.
    
    Then again, I might be wrong ;-)
    
    -Ed
    

    RE: notes about all the TSFOs being ICs
    
    I can only speak for my organization, but we have "downsized" by
    7 of 16 managers (those who plan, write reviews, etc).
    
    Terry...one of those who's still here...

    If only the workers could unite and organize, we could have a full
    blown revolution and take over. But since we cannot organize overselves
    I suspect after the revolution the company would run even quicker into the
    ground !!!
    
    with regards
    Paul Harrison 

>    If only the workers could unite and organize, we could have a full
>    blown revolution and take over. 

	I believe we could unite and organize. So what if we did? Would there
	really be a big change? I suspect not. If the workers took over completely
	there would be an exchange of one management for an other. Sure there
	might be some good things happening but much would also be lost because
	of too many people having to narrow a view because of their limited
	knowledge of the total picture. 

	Or we could form a union and force the current management to run the
	company completely into the ground much faster then they are currently
	able. Either way I don't see a big win.

			Alfred

>>>	Or we could form a union and force the current management to run the
>>>	company completely into the ground much faster then they are currently
>>>	able.

I think this is the core of Digital's problem: it's been run as if all the
employees (both managers and individual contributors) were in a union.

Performance didn't really matter--you had a job for life. If managers couldn't
get individual contributors to staff a project--not to worry, just hire from
the outside. Employees who didn't have a useful function were "in transition."
Employees had complete freedom in turning down projects if they weren't
interested in them. 

There's been very little accountability, little cost control. Digital's been
merely a giant company that seemed to exist to keep employees happy.

I don't know what the company was like in the '70s (I wasn't here), but this is
the way it's been in the '80s.

Vicki Meagher

    -1
    
    Perhaps.  But I've seen sales people held accountable to a single
    metric during the 80s.  Most of the ones that did not reach their goals
    over the course of (max) one year, were moved out using the corrective 
    action plan.
    
    

    FWIW- About five weeks ago a downsizing occurred in the Mid Atlantic
    Area Customer Services district. Many of the details were not revealed
    by the mangers breaking the news to those of us still remaining but
    a little research showed about 22 to 25 customer service engineers
    TSFO'd.
    
    And two unit managers.
    
    FWIW in the downtown Washington DC customer service office, there are
    people here from 07:00 to very late at night, pm's standby,after hours
    work, etc.  Mangers arrive at 07:45 and are out of the office by
    5:00 pm, some leave earlier.Some also are a part of the home project
    and get to work out of their homes instead of being where the customer
    action is.  It would be nice to know that they are all attending
    meetings and formulating strategies, but sometimes I wonder????
    

  Re .-1

> ... in the Mid Atlantic Area Customer Services.
 
  Out of interest, how many customers *do* we have in the Mid Atlantic ?

  Frank

That's the Mid-Atlantic States.

It includes little unpopulated areas like Pennsylvania and Delaware.
And insignificant customers like DuPont.

:^)

~K.

    In his address to the COE winners last week, Bob Palmer stated that he
    tried to find out what the senior managment team was responsible and
    accountable for and he found out that it was 'nothing' - i.e. everyone
    was dodging responsiblility.  He then asked them the question - 
    'then why are you paid so much?'  -- the address was videotaped and
    in our feedback session we STRONGLY suggested that the tape be played 
    to the employee population at large this week over DVN. Apparently,
    this hasn't happened yet.  I plan to send BP a memo asking that the
    video be released.  He really does know what is wrong with this company
    and seems to have the right ideas on how to fix it.  I encourage the
    rest of you to do so as well.

    re .27, .28  Not sure of the amount of revenue or even the number of
    customers, but they do include small organizations such as the Senate,
    House of Reps, Pentagon, Naval Sea Systems Command, Space Warfare,
    and of course the Executive Office of the President.  All I can say is
    that we're making budget, but if we don't drop our service prices soon
    most of the business will go to Mom and Pop's Plumbing Supply and
    Computer Repair Shop down the street.
    
    Question:  Why are there so few jokes about president-elect Clinton
    and his sidekick Al Gore????????
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Answer: Because NO ONE thinks its funny.

    RE: -1
    
    Answer: Because they haven't done anything stupid, yet.

    RE:.16 (removing a layer of management)
    
    This DID happen, once, at least in Upstate New York. Once upon a time
    there was three layers locally, Unit Manager -> Branch Manager ->
    District Manager. Two locally and one far away. All of a sudden - *POOF*
    no more Branch Managers. 
    
    Did anyone lose their job?
    
    You KNOW the answer to that one.
    
    .mike.

    
    
    
       Regarding .29
    
      Dave, I was "pumped up" after seeing your entry. My moral went from
    about 2 1/2 to 10, on a scale from 1 to 10. I sent my 2 cents to BP
    regarding seeing that address over the DVN.
    
      The next thing is to actually see him do something about the problem.
    
    
                                                   Phil...

    Re: managers downsized - a software engineering personal perspective
    
    Once upon a time, managing was considered hard work, difficult to
    learn, a bit exciting, and honorable to attempt.  If you failed in the
    attempt, the failure was considered its own punishment, what with the
    public humiliation, and you were gracefully allowed to resume an
    individual contributor role or perhaps move temporarily into "the
    penalty box" (Special Projects Manager; Program Mumble Manager; etc.)
    before returning to a new management assignment.
    
    After my major failed assignment, I was very lucky - I was immediately
    drafted into another management assignment.  So I've not actually spent
    time in the Penalty Box, but it was nice to know it was there.
    
    Today, things are different.  I know from facts of TFSOs (which I will
    not disclose here out of respect for the privacy of the individuals
    affected) that the Penalty Box capacity is much smaller, and it has a
    large slide that leads to the door.  
    
    From a personal standpoint, what this means to me is that my next major
    mistake has a much higher probability of putting me on the street, with 
    technical skills that are 10 years out of date.  
    
    Now that seems like an apparently good reason for timidity: don't mess
    up, stay quiet.  Another apparently good reason for timidity is that
    with changing circumstances come changing rules - which therefore at
    least temporarily contain inconsistencies and contradictions.
    
    Only one problem: timidity won't help Digital get better.  No risks, no
    rewards.
    
    So, recently, I've frequently said to myself "It's better to get fired
    for taking action than to sit around being paralyzed."
    
    	/john

    
    re: .31
    
    	....you've obviously never lived in Arkansas!